Author
Topic: Wonderful Information (Read 10969 times)

"Look at what regulation did. For every example of the ills of deregulation I can provide examples of frankensteinian regulation. Look at Enron during the regulation era of Clinton's admin. You cannot legislate morality. Period. You can punish the lack of...the problem with our judicial system is often money creates ways for people to escape justice."

Now you are being obtuse. I am not supporting deregulation, unless allowing a product to be sold which undergoes the same certification and inspection process as other dairy products is deregulation. My illustration was simple: Regulation does not guarantee anything...in fact I said that you "cannot legislate morality". Putting it simply, no matter what the laws people will find ways to break them regardless of the consequences if they think they can get away with it. Can you understand that?

To equate that with legalizing murder is asinine and does nothing to help your argument. Might as well compare nukes with handguns.....lol

Alright, since you called me Obtuse,Did I ever once equate deregulating milk with murder? Nope. Did I ever once equate: "Regulation does not guarantee anything...in fact I said that you "cannot legislate morality". Putting it simply, no matter what the laws people will find ways to break them regardless of the consequences if they think they can get away with it. Can you understand that? " with murder? Nope.

My point was to blast a hole in your faulty logic and to point out that your example was very ironic and "does nothing to help your argument.[...] lol". Why don't you go back and read your one point: "Look at Enron during the regulation era of Clinton's admin. You cannot legislate morality." and then try to figure out the point I am really trying to make. While you are at it, google search "reductio ad absurdum" before accusing me of being obtuse again. Also while you are at it- ask yourself how the argument you are making actually comes across- cause it sounds like an attack on regulation and a defense of de-regulation (the opposite of regulation). Once you have finished that, consider how obtuse I am really being.

Regulation does not guarantee anything- agreed and never disputed here. In fact nothing really guarantees anything in this universe- there is always a dice roll. But regarding regulation, that does not mean it is futile or unhelpful. I agree, USDA inspection likely miss a lot- but does that mean they are worthless or do not accomplish some good? I don't think so- it simply means the process needs to be fix.

"Bovine tuberculosis has been specifically and conclusively diagnosed in humans. It is decidedly uncommon in a world in which human tuberculosis is common. The spread of bovine tuberculosis in humans is clouded by historic misinformation and imperfect science. In The Untold Story of Milk, Ron Schmid does a thorough job of debunking the huge store of medical dogma on this subject.6 During the 1800s, when tuberculosis was widespread in the US, the complexity of the disease was unknown. A few people had intestinal tuberculosis presumably from ingesting, rather than inhaling, the bacteria. Since it was known that many dairy cows were infected with tuberculosis it was presumed—and reinforced by those pushing for pasteurization—that milk was the vehicle of contagion. When it was found that cows had a distinct form of tuberculosis, the dogma expanded, generalizing that all human infections with the bovine form of the bacteria were transmitted through milk (even though the vast majority had lung infections caused by inhalation not ingestion).In his book, Ron Schmid further details the lack of any association of human infection with bovine tuberculosis within communities that regularly consumed raw milk."[/quote]

Please read the article attached on bovine and human tuberculosis from the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine. Further, the safety of raw milk cheese is well-covered at http://drinc.ucdavis.edu/dfoods5_new.htmThe intervention of governments for public health and safety in dairy products and their production is not for the purpose of wanton control, but for the benefit of ALL of us, not just those who choose to use raw milk products (remember that all the rest of us can 'catch' these diseases without choosing how others live their lives).

I am using California and UC Davis, specifically, as examples for what is done nationwide. Naturally, food safety is not limited to dairy products. I believe it was Boofer who said something about sterilizing fruits and vegetables. This is not a fair comparison to sterilizing milk, as fruits and vegetables need only be SURFACE sterilized. An analogy is that of cuts of beef--steak is 'surface sterilized' from E. coli by outside searing. The inside is intact and is not subject to contact with E. coli. Ground beef, on the other hand, is inherently subject to contact contamination with E. coli through the process of grinding and mixing, thus must be cooked to a safe internal temperature. Consider fruits and vegs like steak, and milk and cheese like ground beef.

The Western Center for Food Safety http://wcfs.ucdavis.edu/ shows extensive work done for public safety in food production

Because I am a scientist involved in the production of fruits and nuts (UC Davis), and my husband is a retired professor of ruminant physiology from the UC Davis Vet School, we have a strong bias toward science-based factual information. People get very invested in their views one way or another on raw milk and similar issues, such as vaccination. I can say from my experience, that organically raised produce is easier to produce when conventional growers control pests in the same general areas that organic growers operate, because the conventional growers are doing much of the 'work' of reducing those pests. Likewise, all those who vaccinate their kids are greatly reducing the likelihood that kids from families that don't vaccinate won't contract communicable diseases that are prevented by vaccination. The World Health Organization states: In 1980, before widespread vaccination, measles caused an estimated 2.6 million deaths each year.

Who would like to live in a world without vaccination, antibiotics, or pasteurization? How many of us would enjoy going back to a world where most people were subsistence farmers? I have a friend who was 1 of 13 children in her family in rural Mexico--she never went to school past age 8 because everyone had to work just to raise enough food to feed themselves. There was no dental care and very little medical care. She is only in her 40's--and much of the world still lives that way. How many of us want to give up all that technological advances have given us? How many who advocate raw milk for themselves and their children would not seek conventional medical help if one of their children were severely ill as a result? I lived in Mexico for 5 years and have also done consulting work on food production in Afghanistan and Morocco--and seen how people live where much of what we take for granted is not available to them.

We are so very lucky to have the choices we have--despite those who think 'big business' or 'government' is out to control our lives. We have the luxury of health! So drink raw milk if you choose--if you happen to be one of the few who contracts a life-threatening disease, please ensure that all of the expenses you incur are paid only by you, and not by any taxpayer who should not be affected by your personal choice! If you contract an infectious disease as a result of consuming raw dairy products, I hope no one else suffers as a result.

I just took a look at recent (last 3 months) FDA food recalls and I see lots of nutrition/energy bars, lots of ice cream (salmonella) entries...3 cheese entries that apparently all involve Whole Foods and Kenny's Farmhouse cheese. No milk, raw or otherwise (not counting the above cheese issues).

Brucellosis case #67 was NOT contracted from raw milk--she contracted brucellosis from blood spatter from an infected patient who had consumed raw milk cheese produced locally in his home country, Mexico. When the infected individual returned to the US (already infected, the CDC had to assume from the facts of the case), he then spread brucellosis to this health worker.

One's choices often result in a ripple effect for others who did not make the original choice, yet suffer for it.

I am not trying to make a case for only raw milk being a food safety risk, rather that specifically, since this is the main topic of discussion. It is easier to bring fruits and veggies home from the market and clean them before consumption. How does one 'clean' cheese brought home? The biggest food stores in this country no longer will accept fruit grown in orchards where there is evidence of workers using the orchard as a garbage dump for their food refuse, or as a latrine--for food safety reasons. Those businesses send representatives for inspection periodically, and growers are therefore much more vigilant and applying these restrictions. I have to assume the same is true for field crops. Commercial dairies and creameries are subject to strict regulation of sanitation practices and periodic inspections--as are meat packing plants, etc. Testing and inspecting each and every product, however, is not possible--and I'm not 'picking on' raw milk products alone. If I make my own cheese from my own milk, I can choose the handling. If I make my own cookies, I can manage contamination more readily than if I buy something prepackaged. We are talking about choices here.

Botanist I agree! as I believe does Mighty Mouse and several others! My issue is not BBrackens choice or want. It's the efferct he will have (Or COULD have on my safety etc or the community on the whole)But it is my beilefe that he will never conceede the middle never mind your point! People fight for the sake or fighting! Has nothing to do with Raw milk or.... But the simple fact that its something to fight against, and rules are always the easiest! I want what I want AND THEN I EXPECT YOU TO PAY WHEN MY DECISION WAS WRONG!

Botanist I agree! as I believe does Mighty Mouse and several others! My issue is not BBrackens choice or want. It's the efferct he will have (Or COULD have on my safety etc or the community on the whole)But it is my beilefe that he will never conceede the middle never mind your point! People fight for the sake or fighting! Has nothing to do with Raw milk or.... But the simple fact that its something to fight against, and rules are always the easiest! I want what I want AND THEN I EXPECT YOU TO PAY WHEN MY DECISION WAS WRONG!

Actually, no. From what I have read (and I have not followed the links provided above...Thank you Botanist!) in the past it seemed to me that it (the raw milk question) was both being blown out of proportion and was not given the same consideration as other health issues.

Above all, I AM indeed a combination of a conservative and libertarian...a position I have migrated to from the extreme opposite positions held when I was younger and a bit more of an Idealist. Since those days, I have seen the ideals and promise and potential continually fail due to human nature (another story altogether, but I can provide details should anyone be interested...privately)...so, slowly over the last 38 years I have migrated to my current views.

HOWEVER one of the basic tenants of my libertarian view is that I should be allowed to do as I please provided I do NOT harm or threaten harm to another or another's property. That should apply to all, and I believe our society would be the better ...but again, human nature would negate a universal application of that ideal.

I will digest the information linked above and if that alters my view, not only will I admit it here, but I will also thank Botanist for providing hard facts as opposed to opinion and perception and incorrect allegory.

I believe it was Boofer who said something about sterilizing fruits and vegetables.

Please don't misquote me.

My reference was to the reports in the past of tainted green farm crops, including spinach & tomatoes. Let me also include tainted pasteurized milk to that caution. I don't believe that pasteurization is a cure-all solution to microbial infections in our foodstuffs. Raw milk producers, producers of farm vegetables, the meat industry, and industrial milk producers need to be policed and scrutinized to ensure they are following safety guidelines in the public's best interest.

Some of the material by folks who have tried to clarify the need for this scrutiny:

My inclusion of meat producers above is to demonstrate that there are corners cut in other foodstuffs to the detriment of the consumer. Greed and the desire to maximize profits over human health are a priority for some food producers.

I believe that choice should be an option. Choice to consume raw milk products from reputable producers.

I realy thought this thread had gone by the way side a while ago lol. Obviously its a big issue! Which in it self says there is no easy answer. No matter what happens there will be a large group of unhappy people.

HOWEVER one of the basic tenants of my libertarian view is that I should be allowed to do as I please provided I do NOT harm or threaten harm to another or another's property. That should apply to all, and I believe our society would be the better ...but again, human nature would negate a universal application of that ideal.

The problem is you DO threaten and harm others. I am not saying that we should be MADE to immunize our children, but i beleive we should. Not immunizing is leading to more and more issues in society. Your ability to own a hand gun or weapon does threaten me, if not in your hands then in the hands of the burglar or the people he sells it too. Its never as simple as WHAT I WANT! or that because I dont CONSCIOUSLY plan to hurt some one means I wont. I think there is comprimise that can be made all around. You DO have a choice! If RAW milk is that important to you get a cow! Fight for your basic right to own that cow! You want it, its your yard/patio/condo so you have a liberal right to own it so YOU can milk it and enjoy raw milk. i know some will think I am being obtuse or extremist with that, but its no more obtuse or extrem then saying that the short comings in the system we have do not offer any safety and so why have rules at all as implied even if not directly stated.

The problem is you DO threaten and harm others. I am not saying that we should be MADE to immunize our children, but i beleive we should. Not immunizing is leading to more and more issues in society. Your ability to own a hand gun or weapon does threaten me, if not in your hands then in the hands of the burglar or the people he sells it too. Its never as simple as WHAT I WANT! or that because I dont CONSCIOUSLY plan to hurt some one means I wont. I think there is comprimise that can be made all around. You DO have a choice! If RAW milk is that important to you get a cow! Fight for your basic right to own that cow! You want it, its your yard/patio/condo so you have a liberal right to own it so YOU can milk it and enjoy raw milk. i know some will think I am being obtuse or extremist with that, but its no more obtuse or extrem then saying that the short comings in the system we have do not offer any safety and so why have rules at all as implied even if not directly stated.

lol First of all, I do believe in immunizations, provided they are proven safe and have legitimately passed FDA testing and approval. I have had all the usual ones, as have my children. The likelihood of someone communicating measles or polio, or smallpox (if contracted) is a bit more of a worry than issues that exist from raw milk. Are you one of those who would fire employees for not getting a flu shot?

You will have to address the gun issue with our constitution, which guarantees us the right to own weapons (please do not go into mass destruction types...thats just ridiculous). As far as gun control goes...works great in New York, doesn't it? ohh...no it doesn't... Only the criminals and police have guns there.... Now that's reassuring.

If you want to take things to that extreme, then your use of a vehicle threatens my person and property, therefore you should not be allowed to drive. You can take anything to ridiculous lengths...

You do seem to believe that the consumption of raw milk will likely lead to all sorts of diseases being communicated to people who do not consume it.... What is the likelihood of that happening in real statistics? Let's deal with real numbers by legitimate studies and not anecdotes, gut feel, and/or pseudo-science.

Reading what you want in things doesnt make you any more correct then ' gut feel, and/or pseudo-science'

I said I believe we SHOULD immunize not be MADE too! I am not advocating against your RIGHT to bear arms! So would I fire people who dont get immunized, depends what the company policy and our industry is. I am saying that even though the right is there, there are still rules made to limit and control there use etc. YOUR GUT reaction to limit or ignore mass destruction weapons is as ridicoulous as asking for studies on something that cant be studied with out it being too late! To get the numbers in the quantaties you want would mean allowing the sale, and IF/WHEN the studies show what the current system fears its a little late no?Or would you also be for testing the ability for a condom to prevent the transfer of aids? Hmm be great if it works but if it doesnt, well sorry was a good idea too bad didnt work for you!

And if you want to qoute me thwen dont take the parts that just show your point, I have been consistent in my beliefe that CERTAIN sales of raw milk should be allowed, an ability for choice should be permitted, with checks in place!

The ability to conduct studies does exist as raw milk is drunk daily throughout the world. Raw milk sales in Texas, for example, strains the available supply. The dairy I get my milk from for cheese making sets a limit of 2 gallons per person because they often run out. The information is already out there...raw milk is used and available today in many locales throughout the US as well as the world. There are also publications related to that...see Boofer's links above regarding a couple of books related to milk. Read what is available at the link, even if you choose not to buy the books.

I plan on reading the links provided by Botanist this weekend when I can sit and spend some time digesting the information.

Thats my point though BBracken! You have access to raw milk. I would live to see Canada open the door alittle, make it at least a provincial choice, here there is no choice at all, beyond buying a cow and milking myself, but even then it would be illegal to share that milk whithin my own house hold! So while I believe there should be some choice allowed I dont think that its as simple as I want so I should Have! I think that we expect the government to have check s balances rules and limitations in place, and NOT make it a free for all of what the INDIVIDUAL WANTS! From what you have in Texas what do you want to see changed?A discussion on actual realistic changes and how they can be implemented rather then "The Gove has no right to... I want to do what I want.... I think would be more advantageous. sailor on another thread has some alternatives to pasturization listed. As I have said I see value in small farm sales, where the buyer has access to make an informed decision, not simply reacing into the cooler and randomly grabbing a gallon of milk on a shelf without being aware of the differences. Ag co-ops etc may be an idea.

Ah...ok, that is simple. I would like to see raw milk available in grocery or specialty stores in town (illegal in the state of Texas)...and yes, they should be subject to the same quality standards as any other food source, as ineffective as that is/can be.

As it is now, by law, you have to buy raw milk from the dairy itself, which in my case involves a 40 minute drive (or more depending on traffic) to get the milk and then another 40 or so back...so raw milk is available, but they (the law) intentionally make it a pain to acquire. Even then, the relatively small dairy I purchase at places a limit of 2 gallons per purchase because they sell out...they are the only dairy within reasonable distance to offer it.

If I gave the impression that it was as simple as "I want it, so I should get it" then I apologize...nothing is ever as simple as that. However, I do fail to see why the Dairy Council is so against it that they have flooded the state govt with lobbying efforts (big money) to outlaw it altogether...or rather, I fail to see why they should want to do so. Due to price (organic, grass fed etc etc) this raw milk would not be purchased by the mainstream, but rather by a smaller percentage of the population. I am thankful that this dairy has a great reputation (they sell drinkable yogurt at Whole Foods and Central Market) and that I can trust that they are doing their best to make a good product. If not, I would not be a customer of theirs.

The irony is: the Dairy Council uses money provided by the dairies that want to sell raw milk to lobby against it.

Well why they are against it is obvious.First profits, second creating an image to differentiate and third- the easies way to get a following is to be AGAINST something!The second and third go together to insure the first!And ultimatley bad publicity that COULD/MAY happen if raw milk leads to issues would be cast on DAIRY PRODUCTS!As an example Canadian BEEF was not an issue, certain beef through NORMAL procedures was found to have BSE, this was BEFORE it was sold to consumers (happened the way defects should be found). This stopped the export on ALL beef. Again a small issue becomes bigger, one farmers choice to send a bad cow to market and the industry on the whole suffered, as well the consumer was potentialy endangered.